browser_enable_network_log

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Since annotations are absent, the description bears full transparency burden. It clearly communicates that enabling captures network requests and that logs are retrievable, but lacks details on persistence, performance impact, or disabling capabilities.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short, focused sentences with no wasted words. The purpose and follow-up action are front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple enable tool with one parameter and an output schema (assumed present), the description is largely complete. It covers the primary action and retrieval path, though it omits any mention of disabling or resetting the log.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% (session_id has a clear description). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline expectation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the tool enables network request logging and specifies that captured logs can be retrieved via browser_get_network_logs. This distinguishes it from its sibling tool browser_get_network_logs.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage context by linking to browser_get_network_logs, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.